usgs_earthquake_detail

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden, but it only states the action without any behavioral context (e.g., data freshness, rate limits, or side effects). The lack of details beyond the basic function leaves agents uninformed about the tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single clear sentence, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it is so sparse that it may sacrifice valuable information; still, it earns points for efficiency.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'details' are returned, leaving agents without understanding of the tool's output or how to interpret results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The sole parameter 'event_id' lacks any description in the schema (0% coverage) and the tool description adds no explanation of what event_id is, its format, or how to obtain it. This leaves agents with no guidance on how to provide a valid input.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Get details for a specific USGS earthquake event' clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'details for a specific USGS earthquake event'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like usgs_earthquakes_by_region (which lists earthquakes by region) and usgs_recent_earthquakes (which lists recent earthquakes), providing specificity around a single event.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings, no mention of prerequisites, or when not to use it. Agents have no context to select this tool over alternatives like usgs_earthquakes_by_region or usgs_recent_earthquakes.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.